ADR 0191: the mesh's names are known by where they were composed, not by their suffix

A progressive insight: the rule and its check were stated as a suffix test; the mesh composes both
names of a route and publishes its internal one. The decision is unchanged.

02-DECISIONS/0191-the-meshs-resolver-holds-only-the-meshs-own-names.md

@@ -11,6 +11,15 @@ supersedes-in-part:
 
 # 191. The mesh's resolver holds only the mesh's own names; a public name resolves publicly
 
+> **Progressive insight — 2026-10-03.** The first implementation told the mesh's names from public
+> ones by their spelling — a name ending in the mesh suffix — and this record said so: the Decision
+> read *"only names under its own suffix"*, and the roster check *"every name the roster carries ends
+> in the mesh suffix"*. The mesh needs no such test: it composes both names of every route itself,
+> `name` from the node's public domain and `internal-name` from its own domain under the serving node
+> (ADR 0151), and publishes the second. Which names are its own is known from where each was
+> composed. Both sentences now say that; what was decided — a public name is never given a private
+> answer — is unchanged.
+
 ## Context
 
 **[ADR 0066](0066-public-routing-is-name-agnostic.md) published every routed name into internal
@@ -63,7 +72,8 @@ every public name the mesh serves, is forwarded and resolves publicly. Chosen.
 
 ## Decision
 
-**The mesh publishes into internal resolution only names under its own suffix.** A machine's name,
+**The mesh publishes into internal resolution only the names it composes for itself** — a
+machine's name, and each route's `internal-name`, never a route's public `name`. A machine's name,
 and through it every `<label>.<node>.internal`, resolve to that machine's private address. **A public
 name is never given a private answer by the mesh**: it resolves through public DNS to the public
 address, from members and non-members alike.
@@ -93,8 +103,8 @@ reachability — the lab — certifies its internal names and has no public name
 
 **How each is checked:**
 
-- **The roster:** the controller's catalogue tests assert that every name the roster carries ends in
-  the mesh suffix — a routed public name in it fails the build.
+- **The roster:** the controller's catalogue tests assert that the names served are routes'
+  internal names and that no route's public name is among them — one published fails the build.
 - **On a machine:** asking the machine's resolver for a public name the mesh serves returns the
   public address, and asking it for that route's internal name returns the private one. Asked from a
   non-member on a LAN the resolver answers, the first must hold as well.

03-DESIGN/01-to-be/08-connectivity.md

@@ -425,15 +425,16 @@ the cost of not seeing it is inventing a mechanism that already exists.
 
 ### The mesh resolves only its own names; a public name resolves publicly
 
-**The mesh's resolver holds names under the mesh suffix and nothing else** — every machine, and through
-it every route's internal name `<label>.<node>.internal`
+**The mesh's resolver holds the names the mesh composes for itself and nothing else** — every
+machine's name, and every route's internal name `<label>.<node>.internal`
 ([ADR 0151](../../02-DECISIONS/0151-a-routes-internal-name-is-composed-under-the-node-that-serves-it.md)).
 **A public name the mesh serves is never given a private answer**: it is forwarded and resolves to the
 public address, from a member and from anything else the resolver answers — a resolver may serve a
 machine's LAN, and a phone on that LAN must get the address it can reach
 ([ADR 0191](../../02-DECISIONS/0191-the-meshs-resolver-holds-only-the-meshs-own-names.md)). Inside the
 mesh, a routed service is reached, and certified by the internal authority, under its internal name.
-*Checked by the controller's catalogue tests — every name the roster carries ends in the mesh suffix —
+*Checked by the controller's catalogue tests — the names served are routes' internal names, and no
+route's public name is among them —
 and on a machine by asking its resolver for a public name the mesh serves: the answer is the public
 address.*
 
@@ -1009,9 +1010,6 @@ The list is worth having in one place, because it is most of the argument:
   operator's to move between meshes, but the manifest layer still stores it as a literal — so today
   the composition is a per-node override rather than the design. The interpolation that would let a
   module carry a label and a node carry the domain, and the mesh join them, does not yet exist.
-- **Withdrawing public names from internal resolution.** The roster still publishes every routed
-  public name at its serving node's private address, which ADR 0191 forbids; until the controller
-  stops, a resolver that answers a LAN hands that LAN's non-members addresses they cannot reach.
 
 ## The hub adopts the predecessor's tunnel